GENEVA:
Trade negotiators at the World Trade Organization (WTO) were due to go
into further consultations, and smaller huddles, to agree on the text
of a statement or declaration to be issued by the 2nd Ministerial Conference
which, effectively, will have one-and-a-half days of working meetings
over 18-20 May.

Trade
diplomats still were saying that no one wants the Geneva Ministerial to
become like the one at Singapore, where a few ministers held negotiations
for long periods, but that they want the "declaration text" to be agreed
and out of the way to enable ministers to have substantive talks. But
achieving this seems less easy and, at the least, some weekend negotiations
may have to take place.

Negotiating
on negotiations

Informal
consultations chaired by WTO Director-General Renato Ruggiero broke up
15 May night without coming to grips with the operative part of the declaration
- which, as worded, is about "negotiating on what to negotiate".

There
were still some differences on "assessments" and "declaratory" views,
such as whether there should be an affirmation or reaffirmation of the
primacy of the multilateral system and/or whether such a reference should
also include words legitimizing regional arrangements (such as MERCOSUR),
which Argentina is demanding.

But
some basic differences among trade negotiators on the wordings and phraseology
of the draft text to be adopted and issued on the 20th relate to the "preparatory
process" scheduled to commence in the beginning of 1999 and to make recommendations
for the Third Ministerial (presumably to launch negotiations). The disputes
and differences turn around various alternatives and combinations of these
negotiations about negotiations:

whether there would only be sectoral negotiations, with emphasis
on or mention of preparations on agriculture and a further round
of services negotiations already mandated under the WTO agreements;

The
US wants, at least for now, only sectoral negotiations. Having seen gains
for itself in such negotiations since Marrakesh - basic telecoms, financial
services, and zero- tariff negotiations on information technology products
and spirits - it wants no more basket of negotiations. Anyhow, it has
no accord with Congress on the negotiating objectives or subjects, let
alone fast-track authority. It can only negotiate on issues where US law
need not be changed.

Argentina
and a few other Cairns Group members want specific mention of agriculture
and the start of the process in the preparatory process to be set in motion.
This is supported by the US, which also wants specific reference to the
services negotiations.

The
EC is opposed to sectoral negotiations, or to mention of any sector-specific
work (in whatever context), but wants some general formulation about the
preparatory process to begin early 1999 to focus on "comprehensive trade
liberalization". It argues that it is not resiling from the commitments
to continue agriculture and services negotiations, only that the commitments
should not be accorded specific mention but rather be referred to as "negotiations
already mandated". It also needs optical formulations that the next round
would be for comprehensive liberalization.

This
last, plus the references in the mandate for the preparatory process to
the Singapore decisions and to any other subjects Members might raise,
in the EC view, covers all the negotiations specifically mandated or envisaged
under reviews, the new issues of investment, competition policy and government
procurement on which Singapore mandated studies - with no commitment to
negotiations, but which are already underway - and others that could be
conveniently brought up.

There
is a whole range of views among developing countries, with many opposing
any decisions that imply negotiations on new issues, or advocating pre-empting
the processes set in motion at Singapore through the Ministerial text,
to those that are totally opposed to anything beyond what is now on the
WTO agenda.

Various
other protagonists have positions falling in between - with some refusing
to contemplate any negotiations on new issues now or in the near future,
to others who are willing to suggest they may consider it later in the
General Council but will not commit themselves to it at this meeting.

Attendance
list

Meanwhile,
the WTO announced that 13 heads of state/government would be at the 50th
anniversary celebrations on the 19th afternoon, with the 14th head, US
President Bill Clinton, doing a solo act on the 18th evening, when, according
to the WTO, he is "expected to make his address on the Commemoration of
the 50th Anniversary."

The
list announced on 15 May would bring from the developing world - besides
the already-announced Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Cuban
President Fidel Castro and Singapore Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong - South
Africa's Nelson Mandela and the Cote d'Ivoire Prime Minister Daniel Kablan
Duncan.

The
event has resulted in some extraordinary security arrangements being put
in place by the hosts, the Swiss confederation, to facilitate the presence
of these wanted and invited guests, and keep at a distance the unwanted
- NGOs and popular movements protesting the WTO, its neo-liberal order
and globalization, which benefit a small minority and marginalize the
vast majority everywhere.

An example
of the arrangements was shown on Swiss TV on 14 May, when the Swiss police
"arrested" a group of German youths, who entered via Basle (Germans can
normally come in without visas) on motorcycles to come to Geneva where
representatives of popular movements are gathering. The arrested youths,
the TV broadcast said, were forced to go back to Germany.

In Geneva
itself, on 15 May, a band of Kurds (protesting Turkey) chained themselves
to the gates, while some 30 of them managed to get into the UN Palais
complex and entered the building to shout slogans. They were subsequently
met by a spokesperson of the Human Rights office and the South African
ambassador who happened to come in at that time. Ultimately, the Human
Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson came and talked to them; the Kurds reportedly
apologized to her and said (before dispersing) they would rather have
seen her peacefully.

Mr.
Clinton, who will fly in and spend a little over two hours perhaps in
Geneva, is expected to announce in his solo commemoration session at the
WTO, an offer to host the 3rd Ministerial meeting - whose timing is still
a matter of contention - to launch negotiations - whose scope and subjects
are even more in dispute.

Standstill
accord on electronic commerce

And
for coming here to participate in and commemorate the 50th anniversary
of the multilateral system, Mr. Clinton wants to carry back, and wave
to his audience at home, another US "win" via the WTO - a WTO "standstill"
accord on no duties on electronic commerce.

US negotiators
have been busy trying their best to convince the other trading partners
to find a way of "delivering" something - an indefinite standstill, a
standstill till 2000 (as the Canadians have proposed), or one till a review
at the WTO - whether as part of a Ministerial text or a separate agreement
or a hybrid.

It is
not at all clear whether and how this infiltration of "electronic commerce"
into the WTO as a separate issue will be "delivered" to President Clinton
as a prize for coming here - as a WTO standstill accord as part of an
implicit negotiation commitment subject to review (and, if so, what sort
and kind), or something more or less.

Will
it be part of many other reviews to be undertaken in terms of the existing
WTO agreements between now and the next Ministerial, a standalone standstill
that would need consensus extension by a WTO review process, a standstill
that could be upset only by consensus in a review process to decide what
to do on "electronic commerce", or a hybrid of them all?

Trade
diplomats, who broke up their consultations a little after 14-15 May midnight
and were due to resume meeting formally and informally on 15 May afternoon,
were not at all clear on this issue that has been on brought up by the
US, and on which they have been holding a series of bilateral and plurilateral
consultations, mostly in their mission.

On 15
May afternoon, some European sources said, agreement was reached with
the result that there would be a separate text out of the Ministerial
meeting which would not be part of the declaration, covering electronic
commerce. This would provide for the "standstill" and for the issue to
be taken up at the General Council.

Other
sources cautioned that this issue has still to be cleared by the membership
as a whole.

The
developing countries, to the extent that some of them have spoken in the
WTO processes, are not willing to get into the subject without some prior
study at UNCTAD and at the WTO Committee on Trade and Development (CTD).
Egypt has put forward a paper on these lines.

Sources
said that developing countries, and others as well, are objecting to being
rushed into decisions in an area where the Americans have built up a sizable
technological lead and know what is involved, while most others are in
states of relative ignorance.

Some
others have begun to voice objections on legal and "constitutional" grounds
to the way such "new issues" and "new subjects" are negotiated and brought
up and made part of the WTO.

Legal
briefs prepared for them show that their instinctive opposition has a
sound basis, and that the old dictum of "anything is possible among consulting
adults" in the old GATT as a provisional treaty is not at all applicable
in the WTO as an international definitive treaty.

Instead
in the WTO, and its negotiations that still reflect power relations, only
those count who are prepared to be at meetings, and are ready to stand
up and say no and be counted. And this is probably the most difficult
of all to achieve at the WTO, along with having to explain back home why
this was done or why that was not done. (Third World Economics No. 184/185,
1-31 May 1998)